search_service_logs

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states that logs are searched, without revealing that it searches CloudWatch Logs with configurable lookback, query, or limit parameters, or any details about return behavior or access requirements.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded, though it sacrifices needed detail for brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has five parameters, no annotations, and only a one-sentence description, it is incomplete for effective use. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the description still lacks essential context about how to construct queries, set time windows, or interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter-level context. The five parameters (log_group, region, limit, query, lookback_minutes) are completely undocumented beyond their schema definitions, which is especially problematic for required parameters like log_group and region.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the action ('Search') and the resource ('service logs in CloudWatch Logs'). It is distinguishable from the sibling ECS inspection tools, which focus on services, events, task definitions, and target health rather than log contents.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling investigation tools. There is no mention of appropriate scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.